IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	12 June 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130001795
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.




      
      Presiding Officer
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case.

THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

1.  The applicant requests an upgrade of general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he would like to use the GI Bill to go to school and improve his education.  He suffers from a Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and a doctor told him this could have caused his misconduct.

DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		26 January 2013
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions 
c. Date of Discharge:			28 January 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Pattern of Misconduct, AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12b						JKA, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment:			D, Forward Support Co, 6th Bn, 37th FA Regiment,  						Camp Casey, Korea
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	21 April 2009, 3 years, 32 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 9 months, 8 days
h. Total Service:			2 years, 9 months, 8 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-4
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	91J10, QM/Chemical Equipment Repairer
m. GT Score:				100
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR, ASUA
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes	
u. Prior Board Review:			No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 January 2012, for a period of 3 years and 32 weeks.  He was 27 years old at the time and a high school graduate.   The applicant’s record does not show any significant achievements or acts of valor.  When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Camp Casey, Korea.


SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES

1.  On 13 December 2011, the unit commander notified the applicant of his intent to process him for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, by reason of pattern of misconduct; specifically for receiving 2 Articles 15 for various incidents of misconduct ranging from failure to report, failure to obey lawful orders, lying to NCOs, and showing no signs of rehabilitation.
      
2.  Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and informed the applicant of his rights.

3.  On 14 December 2011, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and indicated he would submit a statement on his behalf (NIF).  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the discharge with a general, under honorable conditions characterization of service.  

4.  On 28 December 2011, the separation authority, waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  

5.  The applicant was separated on 28 January 2012, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14-12b, for a Pattern of Misconduct, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JKA and an RE code of 3.

6.  The applicant’s record does not contain any evidence of time lost.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD

1.  The applicant's disciplinary record includes his acceptance of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), as follows:

      a.  Company Grade Article 15, issued on 25 May 2011, for failure to report on 2 occasions (110130, 110820), missed movement (110503).  His punishment consisted of forfeiture of pay in the amount of $429.00, 14 days of extra duty and restriction.
      
      b.  Field Grade Article 15, issued on 29 June 2011, for breaking restriction (110604).  His punishment consisted of reduction to E-1 (the reduction from E-2 to E-1 was suspended); forfeiture of pay in the amount of $733.00 for 2 months (suspended); 45 days of extra duty, 45 days of restriction, and an oral reprimand.
      
      c.  The suspended sentence of reduction to E-1 and forfeiture of pay imposed on         29 June 2011, was vacated for 3 new offenses of failure to report (110716, 110713, 110712).
      
2.  Twelve negative counseling statements dated between 13 July 2011 and 4 September 2011, for offenses related to failure to report to his designated place of duty on multiple occasions, failure to follow instructions, physically threatening an NCO, disrespectful to an NCO, and destruction of government property.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT 

None provided with the application.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None provided with the application.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY

1.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or being absent without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed.  Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.  

2.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.

3.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered.  However, after examining his military records and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  The record confirms the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  By the repeated incidents of misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant’s service was marred by two Article 15s for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and numerous negative counseling statements.

3.  The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that his service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.  

4.  The applicant contends that he wants to go to school and an upgrade of his discharge would allow him to use the GI Bill.  However, eligibility for Veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.

5.  The applicant also contends that he suffers from TBI and the doctor has told him this condition caused his misconduct while in the Army.  However, the service record contains no evidence of a Traumatic Brain Injury diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that his discharge was the result of any medical condition.  In fact, the record shows that on 1 December 2011, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which indicates he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong.  The staff psychiatrist indicated the applicant was suffering from an adjustment disorder with depressed mood and the tests administered to the applicant for PTSD and TBI were negative.  
 
6.  Records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.

7.  Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief. 


SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review    	Date: 	12 June 2013	Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No

Counsel: 			None

Witnesses/Observers: 	NA

Board Vote:
Character  	Change:  0	No Change:  5
Reason	Change:  0	No Change:  5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:		No
Change Characterization to:	No Change
Change Reason to:			No Change
Change Authority for Separation:	NA
Change RE Code to:		NA
Grade Restoration to:		NA
Other:					NA




















Legend:
AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record	FG - Field Grade	IADT – Initial Active Duty Training	 	RE - Reentry
AWOL - Absent Without Leave	GD - General Discharge	NA - Not applicable	SCM- Summary Court Martial
BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge	HS - High School	NIF - Not in File	SPCM - Special Court Martial
CG - Company Grade Article 15	HD - Honorable Discharge	OAD - Ordered to Active Duty	UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge  
CID - Criminal investigation Department	MP – Military Police	OMPF - Official Military Personnel File	UOTH - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions
ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR 20130001795

Page 6 of 6 pages



ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1